by

“Unsound waves” (Alpha waves)

WAVESAlpha waves are electric neural oscillations in the human brain. Since they occur during meditation, some advocates tout them as desirable. However, they also happen under unpleasant conditions, such as a throbbing pain and night terrors. They are simply the middle ground on Electroencephalography recordings, and there is no evidence a person is more peaceful, insightful, or receptive while producing them.

However, if one is just hankering to boost them there alpha waves, lie down, close your eyes, and clear your mind. No “Blissful Harmony Cactus” CD is needed. One needn’t buy, as one ad promoted, “Pharmaceutical-grade hydrolysates to rebuild the body’s collagen.” I’m unsure what that means, but perhaps I will after I increase my focus through alpha wave enhancement.

I decided to test the theory, and compare it with results championed by womenswisdom.com. By the way, this was penned by a guy named James, and combined with what was written, the website’s name seems doubly dubious. At any rate, I should now be reaping these benefits:

Creativity. I’m certainly having no issue whipping out this anti-alpha waves therapy post.

A sense of calm. That’s kind of hard with my children engaged in a cacophonous three-way battle for a Captain America shield eight feet away. If scientists invent any pill that gives tranquility under these conditions, I’ll pop away.

Decreased fear and anxiety. Those levels were already at zero, so maybe I’m a poor test subject.

It also promises “Super learning,” “Improved immune response,” “Problem solving,” and “Increased inner awareness.” Indeed, I am aware that I super-learned how to solve the problem of relying on a product that assures me an “Improved immune response.” Broad, untestable, and undefined terms like this are synonymous with quackery.

Since alpha wave therapy is not based on science, its claims vary in boldness. Some say it will just make one more relaxed. Others take that a step further and assert an altered state of consciousness will result. I once owned a new age album whose liner notes warned of the dangers of listening to it while driving, due to alpha waves. It was one of those albums best played in the presence of incense and a lava lamp, so I was unlikely to have it in my car. For maximum danger, I suppose I could have listened to it with the burning incense in my drink holder and my lava lamp plugged into the cigarette lighter.

Then we have some who advocate all of us simultaneously accessing the Schumann Resonances. The Schumann Resonances reside in the Extremely Low Frequency area of Earth’s electromagnetic field spectrum. The resonances are vaguely and superficially similar to alpha waves in people. So the idea is that getting everyone to meditate at the same time will harmonize Earth’s brain to alpha wave goodness. At the other end of the spectrum, conspiracy theorists assert that the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program is a mad scientist plot to practice mind control, or to negatively distort Earth’s consciousness, causing bad juju. However, no person or six billion persons can force a person or planet to enter a state of consciousness by manipulating brain waves.

Similarly, there is Theta Healing, which purports to facilitate immediate psychological changes in the patient. Gulp that hot chocolate with Theta Healing Marshmallows and ward off negative thoughts, zap that backache, and gets rid of that nagging lymphoma.

One urban legend holds that binaural beats common in a subset of new age music will get you stoned. It won’t work any more than smoking marijuana will cause one to hear “Dark Side of the Moon.”

by

“Bleepin’ Lizards” (Our reptilian overlords)

LIZARDIn a world that some people think is flat and others think is inhabited by leprechauns, there are plenty of topics for me to choose from for this blog. But for an uproarious romp through the skeptic landscape, nothing tops the Reptilian Humanoid Theory.

This is the idea that blood-drinking, shape-shifting aliens from the Alpha Draconis star system hunker in bunkers and plot world dominion. They need human blood to shift from Reptilian to humanoid form and can render lowly homo sapiens into a catatonic state by staring at us. Most of the world leaders are Reptilian, or at least related to them. Human fear gives them strength, so they cause war, famine, and disease in a continuing cycle. They also control the media, though this seems almost superfluous for a conspiracy theorist to bother mentioning.

The man most responsible for spreading the idea is former British soccer player David Icke. He argues that Reptilians are referenced in a Babylonian creation myth, where they are dubbed the Anunnaki. Icke has no problem borrowing from other religious stories to create a Reptilian hodgepodge. For instance, he says Anunnaki later bred with humans, with the offspring being mentioned in the Apocrypha. He also suggests Adam was the first Reptilian.

Icke seldom offers evidence, leaving that to his minions. One YouTube video claims to  show a Secret Service agent transforming into reptile form. It references “a series of odd features on his head and face,” without explaining what is out of the ordinary. It also attributes to the agent “very strange behavior and creepy movements,” the speaker’s term for a Secret Service agent looking around observantly. In truth, the agent does look different in the second shot, as it was from a long distance, is out of focus, and in a dark room. The presenter reaches the conclusion that whatever mystery technology kept the agent from reverting to Reptilian form had malfunctioned.

Another believer, writer Zecharia Sitchin, argues the Anunnaki came to Earth for an undiscovered-by-man mineral that allows Reptilians to store huge amounts of information and rapidly travel an inter-dimensional highway.

Reptile men have been featured in many literature works, from H.P. Lovecraft, to the tales of Atlantis, to the Sleestak. The Reptilian theory may have its genesis in these stories. Icke adds a bigoted spin to the idea by asserting the Anunnaki bred with a blond-hair, blue-eyed, extraterrestrial species called the Nordics, producing the superior Aryan race. Some opine Reptilian is thus doublespeak for Jew. This is highly unlikely, since Icke is plenty anti-Semitic without resorting to code.

In his teachings there are three kinds of beings. First, we have the Red Dresses, Icke’s illogical description of our scaly tormenters. Second, we have those those who believe and do exactly what Red Dresses tell them to, the Sheeple. Third, we have those who believe and do exactly what Icke tells them to, the Mad Ones.

The Sheeple include a subset, dubbed the repeaters, who obediently pass Reptilian propaganda onto the masses. The repeaters include all doctors, scientists, teachers, and journalists.

From a skeptic perspective, the points are impossible to disprove. Even if we did something like a DNA test to see if one of the alleged Reptilians was human, our coldblooded overlords are conceded so much power, proponents would say they manipulated the results. Like any good conspiracy theory, any evidence that disproved it would be part of the sinister plan. Counterpoints aren’t worth messing with. For one thing, the burden of proof always lies on the person making the claim. Second, supporters of an idea like this won’t be inconvenienced by evidence, logic, and reason.

I have yet to come across a Reptilian advocate. But I have met Bob Dole, so if they’re right, I have found a Reptilian.

by

“Vitally unimportant” (Vitalism)

RAKEY

Vitalism is the idea that living organisms possess an inner entity that gives them life. This entity is considered immune from the laws of biology, chemistry, and physics. Depending on geography and audience, this entity is called animal magnetism, chi, energy, ki, prana, a soul, or a vital spark.

Early Vitalists were doing genuine science and reached honest, mistaken conclusions. The field played a role in chemistry, giving us the distinction between organic and inorganic substances. The ancient Greeks incorporated Vitalism into their nascent atomist views. A couple of millenniums later, Hans Driesch discovered he could split a fertilized sea urchin egg and watch its two halves become separate, fully-functioning urchins. He concluded this was being caused by an unseen vital force.

This and similar ideas were dismissed with the advent of genetics, the microscope, and germ theory. A key moment was when Friedrich Wohler synthesized urea from inorganic compounds. This disproved the Vitalist idea that only organisms could make such compounds. Later, Adolph Koble and Marcellin Berhelot synthesized several other organic compounds from inorganic ones. They also demonstrated that larger molecules were composed of smaller ones, as opposed to owing their existence to an esoteric life force. Closer to the modern day, biologists discovered numerous molecular scale mechanisms, such as DNA. For all the research that has been done in this field, nary a trace of vital force has been found.

Vitalism still survives on life support through many forms of alternative medicine. These practices center on the idea that humans are sustained by a force unknown to biology, a force out there somewhere, that somehow in some way sustains us. Chiropractics, acupuncture, and Reiki are all built on the premise of unblocking the flow of an undefined energy. Even more vague are ideas such as aura and chakra. But if a purported entity is immeasurable and unobservable, it is medically irrelevant.

Modern Vitalism also rests on the Appeal to Ignorance. No theory has been developed which fully explains the actions of a single cell, much less a higher form of life, so Vitalists are happy to call chi the missing piece.

by

“Levity-ation” (Levitation)

LEVITATIONINGCAT

Levitation is the act of raising one’s self or an object without external aid. It has been scientifically verified aboard space stations, but is otherwise impossible. Tricksters have used illusion, strings, magnets, and other devices pull the ruse. However, since it is one of the easiest frauds to disprove, it is among the least frequently claimed of paranormal abilities. The few who attempt the charade today do it for a handful of audience members in a home setting, aided by darkness, lackeys, and suspension devices or weight-assisted trickery.

The only regular modern claimants are Transcendental Meditation proponents, who assume the lotus and bounce around chanting and rocking. They refer to this as Yogic Flying, which has three stages: Hopping, Floating, and Flying, with the first stage being the only one ever attained.

One technique for the charlatan of yore was to be sandwiched by a pair of strong henchmen, whom he tells he is becoming weightless. The sitter to the medium’s left would take his left hand, while the one on the right would place a hand on the medium’s shoes and hold them together. Done correctly, this would cause it to look like the medium was floating with minimal support, when of course his assistants were entirely responsible for his gravity defying.

Parlor tricksters and mediums were the most frequent levitation claimants, but the idea was too mystical for faith to be left out. It was a feature in the extinct religions of Gnosticism and Hellenism. It is still supported by Satanists, Buddhists, and Hindus, while Catholics have claimed a number of saints could do the trick. The ability is largely vacant in Protestant lore, although Jesus walking on water would be a close approximation. None of these claims have ever survived a scientific challenge, although the Hindus at least give the ability the excellent moniker of Frog Power.

Levitation reached its heyday in the 19th Century, being most popular in the urban U.S. and U.K. It fell out of favor when skeptics exposed their use of wires, pulleys, and lifting techniques. One of the more prominent charlatans was Daniel Home, who wowed audience members by levitating between two balconies before skeptics revealed that Home was merely resting on a connecting ledge, which oversized clothes shielded.

Another fraudster, Easapia Palldiono, claimed she could lift a table. Then two skeptics clandestinely entered a darkened dining room she was working in and snuck under the table. There, they saw the charlatan’s foot strike a table leg to produce raps, which was meant to frighten and distract. The table tilted to the right because of the pressure of her right hand on the surface. Next, she placed her left foot under the left table leg. Pressing down on the tabletop with her left hand and up with her left foot under the table leg, she lifted her foot, causing the table to seemingly rise.

Those less confident in their abilities used photographs. Examination revealed the ruse, with the usual culprit being muslin incorporated to suspend the objects. Signs of the fraud included blurry body parts that suggested bouncing, a waving scarf, and suspended hair. Very few photographs of purported levitation are offered any more since photos are much easier to manipulate and even the gullible would likely not be swayed.

If attempted at all today, the objects are much lighter than a body or table. The levitator, for instance, may use a pencil or telephone book pages. Doing this successfully requires control, not of the brain but of the breath. The trick is to clandestinely blow on the object, usually with the mouth half open. During the short time it takes the shot of breath to reach the object, the person will look away. Also, they are careful to blow at the surface, not the object.

The most well-known practitioner was James Hydrick, who demonstrated the ability on “That’s Incredible!” He failed to replicate the feat on Bob Barker’s “That’s My Line” when James Randi was on stage. Hydrick did it once, but then Randi placed packaging peanuts around the pages, peanuts that would move away if blown on.

Hydrick failed to show any telekinesis talents, but he demonstrated remarkable ability in the ad hoc reasoning department. He said stage lights were infusing the peanuts with a static charge, and that this charge added weight to the pages. Hydrick spent 90 minutes flailing and failing, blowing it indeed.

by

“Hole-y Ghost” (History of ghost hunting)

HOLEYGHOSTThe chilling image darts across the surveillance video, a vaguely human-looking figure gliding past the police station entrance in Espanola, N.M. The video made the national rounds, being aired on CNN and Good Morning America.

Enter professional skeptic and spoilsport Benjamin Radford to ruin everyone’s fun. Radford was able to detect that the image was an insect walking across the camera lens, a far less spooky six-legged creature. Radford deduced that the bug’s smooth movement indicated its weight was being distributed on more than two legs. Another tipoff was that the image cast no shadow.

While this was another fruitless ghost chase, the field is burgeoning. But in spite of countless books, video cameras, cell phone photos, TV shows, and institutes dedicated to finding ghosts, there is not even agreement on precisely what they are. This makes finding, capturing, and tagging one all the more difficult.

Ghosts are usually described as being the remains of a person that has died. Most often, they are thought to be stuck in a netherworld border checkpoint, unable to attain a higher level of existence. However, there is no evidence that this higher realm exists, nor for that matter, that there is a post-mortem labyrinth for them to be stuck in.

In some attempts to modernize ghost-hunting, assertions are made that these spirits are energy of the deceased. But during decomposition, a body’s energies are released into the environment. So the energy does endure, and that is as close to a positive spin that I can give to anyone desperate to find evidence of an afterlife. But there is no reason to believe the energy continues in any recognizable form, or that it passes to another state of consciousness.

Since ghosts are largely undefined, they are freed from the laws of physics and chemistry, and can do whatever a ghost hunter wants them to do. Indeed, ghostly appearances have changed over time. In the 19th Century, even clothes had ghosts and their owners appeared very similar to what their Earthly incarnations did. They were generally transparent, levitating, and had wide freedom of movement, but they looked much like they did when alive. These ideas were consistent with the era of Dickens, Poe, and Washington Irving. Similarly, the notion that a ghost resembled a floating white sheet likely came from burial cloths laid on the dead.

Later, ghosts became less concrete, such as how they were portrayed in The Amityville Horror. Today, white orbs in digital photographs are the most frequently cited evidence of ghosts.

Other examples of alleged evidence are cold spots or breezes, a funny smell, or a sense of being touched. All of these are explicable through mundane reasons. A draft in a 19th Century castle is consistent with the abode, not evidence of a ghostly presence.

Animals are sometimes credited with having a greater awareness of ghosts, an idea doubly good for the believer since it is esoteric and impossible to disprove. Come to think of it, the idea is triply good for pet psychics.

The Winchester House in California is said to be haunted, as are abandoned prisons, asylums, and castles, along with graveyards. There is no reason to think a ghost would be in any of these places, as opposed to lurking around a ranch house near the end of a cul-de-sac, but it fits the narrative better.

Other evidence cited includes photos and videos, but these images are attributable to camera flaws, bad photography, misinterpretation, and fraud.

One of the more common methods used today is electronic voice phenomena. These are popular among believers since body noises, rustling clothes, wind, creaks, whistles, stray radio signals, whispers, camera sounds, and magnetic interference can all be interpreted as ghostly. A more incredulous observer would be asking, “How does an immaterial being bump into something or make a noise while walking (or even walk, for that matter)?” Or, “How does an entity lacking vocal chords and a tongue shriek and babble?”

Trying to put a scientific spin on the field has backed ghost hunters into a haunted corner. If ghosts can be scientifically detected or recorded, there would be irrefutable evidence of it by now, either by happenstance, or through the thousands of endeavors that have attempted to do this very thing. By contrast, if ghosts are unable to be detected in photos, videos, and audio recordings, any supposed proof though these mediums is no such thing.

by

“Magnetic negligence” (Magnet therapy)

MAGNETDOLLAR
Magnet therapy is based on the idea that magnetic fields have healing powers, usually related to increased blood circulation. With one possible exception we will examine later, this idea is not backed by science.

The boldest therapy supporters claim all illnesses are due to an imbalance in energy, so it’s magic magnets to the rescue. There are no way to test these claims, and more attractive to the proponents, no way to disprove them. The field is constructed with anecdotes, post hoc reasoning, communal reinforcement, and undefined terms.

It is unproven that magnets effect the body, for which perhaps we should be thankful. There are at least 10 million chemical compounds, millions of which are toxic, exponentially more than are beneficial. There’s no more reason to try and access magnetic effects than there is to down the contents of the nearest beaker.

Magnetic medicine comes in many forms. You can sleep in a magnetic blanket on a magnetic mattress, awaken to slather on magnetic cream, don magnetic jewelry, dress in magnetic belts, straps, and insoles, then reach for your magnetic water and supplements, though by this point, you might be irresistibly drawn to the refrigerator door.

Like many pseudomedicines, magnetic therapy’s supposed methods change, while the purported results stay the same. It has been said to work as a massage, by impacting iron in red blood cells, and by creating alkaline in the body. Other theories center on alternating nerve impulses, increasing oxygen content, moving ions, and decreasing deposits on blood vessel walls. My favorite guess is that it works by filling the void left by a decrease in Earth’s magnetic field.

The CEO of one magnet company admits, “Magnets don’t cure or heal anything.” The next logical sentence would be, “But damned if I’m not cleaning up on these suckers.” Instead, he follows with, “All magnets do is set your body back to normal so the healing process can begin.” I interpret this to mean that magnets are responsible for our immune system and circadian rhythm.

The most extreme claim I came across promised it would cure cancer. So grab that Tweety Bird off the fridge and slap it on if experiencing excessive cell growth. Another company instructed, “The necklace should be put on as soon as the headache appears and removed as soon as it goes away,” guaranteeing success against any headache lasting less than a lifetime. Magnetic therapy is also used on thoroughbreds, with nary an equine complaint.

Pain relief, especially arthritis, is the most frequently-cited benefit. Arthritis flame-ups vary from day to day, and throughout the day, so any improvement gets credited to the magnet, a regressive fallacy.

Proponents will frequently chime in that there’s nothing to lose. To put that another way, “Medicines A and B were ineffective, so I will rub iron blocks on my wrist in a circular motion.” There should be a reason to think a method will work before trying it, and there is a dearth of reproducible double blind studies suggesting this.

In fairness, there is one feather in the magnetic field therapy cap. In a double blind study at Baylor, permanent magnets resulted in post-polio knee pain subjects experiencing substantially better results than the control group.

The study has not been reproduced and the sample size of 50 was relatively small. Still, there is scientific backing to the idea that, with this specific ailment, permanent magnets may aid in pain relief.

Still, the possibility that magnetic therapy has this value fails to justify using it to stimulate nerve endings, correct energy imbalances caused by electromagnetic contamination, or reinvigorate the thighs of champion race horses.

by

“Sappy Trails to You” (Chemtrails)

SMOGMONSTER
Contrails are long, thin clouds left in the wake of flying aircraft. They are caused by condensation of hot airplane exhaust in cold air. How utterly boring. Much more exciting are chemtrails, which disperse noxious chemicals in order to spread some ill-defined nefariousness.

Whether believers consider it a contrail or chemtrail is determined by appearance, durability, and length, though no consensus exists as to just how colorful, lasting, or long it must be.

Exactly what is being dumped is also not agreed upon, nor is the reason for it being done. Speculative reasons include: Building an electromagnetic weapon; concealing the existence of Planet X; environmental poisoning; mind control; population sterilization; spreading respiratory illnesses; and weakening immune systems. If only for variety, I wish conspiracy theorists would for once asribe benevolent behavior to our mysterious overlords. Like say, spraying the masses with liquified LifeSavers.

Supposed beneficiaries of chemtrail spewing include world governments, Monsanto, and the pharmaceutical industry.

If chemtrails were real, they would form immediately behind the aircraft, as happens during crop dusting. Furthermore, if governments, the military, or corporations are poisoning us by air, they are using inefficient methods. Unleashing chemicals at 30,000 feet would cause them to disperse wildly and would exponentially hamper their potency. To engage in this super-villainy properly, find a night free of wind, fly at a low altitude, and use invisible chemicals.

The most frequent distinction attributed to chemtrails is color. If an airplane is flying directly away from a setting or rising sun, the contrail may appear black. This more devilish look excites the believers, but is due to how shadows work. A contrail can block out much of the sun, resulting in this shadow. Another factor is the distance involved, as this negatively impacts depth perception.

Having more than one contrail seemingly visible at once is also presented as evidence of the multiple streaks being chemtrails. However, when high clouds cast shadows onto a contrail, multiple shadows can be produced. As far as lingering contrails, they are usually the result of weather.

Chemtrail evidence is limited to photos of the sky, pictures that are explained by science. There is no evidence of chemical detection, no videos of chemical-spraying commercial jets, and no Top Secret documents revealed. All national governments, airlines, and environmental scientists would have to be complicit in the plot.

One ground photo presented as evidence is of a supposedly vile liquid inside an airplane. However, this is of flight testing equipment, in which tanks of water simulate passenger weight. Despite this being proven years ago, it still has life in the chemtrail believer community.

Just how easily duped chemtrail proponents can be was demonstrated by British citizen Chris Bovey. When his plane had to make an emergency landing to dump excess fuel, Bovey filmed it and uploaded the video with a caption that suggested the craft was being loaded with chemtrails. It topped one million views, with credulous posters calling it proof and chiding disbelievers as fools or shills. For good measure, Bovey concocted a story about being detained upon arrival and having his cell phone confiscated. This riled up the theorists even more, with at least one site calling it irrefutable proof.

Mick West, editor of Metabunk, explained why people can react in such a way: “When they see something that seems to fit their worldview they jump on it.” Bovey added, “This happens because people want to believe it, are so distrusting of the government, and lack basic scientific understanding.”

Of course, there was no fooling the conspiracy theorists, who cleverly sniffed out Bovey as part of the cover-up.

by

“Thoughts on thinking” (Critical thinking)

THINKOK, boys, girls, and any ancient aliens stopping by Earth for a return visit, time for another critical thinking spotlight, starting with a few more formal fallacies. We are concerned with the argument’s form, not its content. It is possible to use correct premises, reach a correct conclusion, and still commit a logical fallacy.

The classic form of argument goes major premise-minor premise-conclusion. Used correctly, it looks like this:

No men are women.
Lyle is a man.
Therefore, Lyle is not a woman.

Here is an example of it being used incorrectly, in the form of the fallacy of exclusive premises :

No men are women.
Some women are not electricians.
Therefore, some electricians are not men.

Every line here is correct, but the logic remains flawed. There is nothing in either premise that supports the conclusion. The distinction between men and women has no relevance to what percentage of men work as electricians. A key point is that two negative premises can never equal a conclusion.

Building a point in this way requires limiting the terms to three. In the four-term fallacy, an extraneous element is introduced, usually by way of equivocation. This is using the same word, but with a different meaning both times, such as this:

Nothing is more important than good health.
A corndog is better than nothing.
Therefore, a corndog is better than good health.

In the major premise, “nothing” is used to indicate the premium value of good health. In the minor premise, it is used to establish that a corndog’s value is more than zero.

A related fallacy, the quantifier shift, occurs when quantifiers are wrongly transposed. For example:

“Everybody has something to believe in. Therefore, there is something that everybody believes in.” It is true that every person believes is some type of idea, but not true that there is a specific concept that everyone adheres to.

Next, consider the proof by example, in which one or two examples are presented as proof of a broader statement. Entire conspiracy theories are built on this faulty premise. It is also common in political and social discourse. You might see it in this form:

“Pol Pot and Joseph Stalin committed mass murder, so atheists are responsible for genocide.” In the interest of balance, it could also be, “94 percent of Nazi Germany was Christian; therefore followers of Jesus endorse the Holocaust.”

Now we’ll tackle some informal fallacies. These are arguments whose premises fail to support the conclusion. These usually involve a problem with reasoning in addition to logical structure flaws.

One of the more common is Begging the Question, also known as Circular Reasoning. This happens when the speaker attempts to prove something that is included in the initial premise of an argument. Put another way, a proposition which requires proof is assumed without offering this proof.

As Aristotle said, “Begging or assuming the point at issue consists of failing to demonstrate the required proposition.” That pretty much says the same thing as above, but I wanted to reference a Greek philosopher to seem more impressive. Anyway, here is some question-begging:

“Children’s memories of previous lives confirm the existence of past lives because there would be no other source for these memories.”

The conclusion is that past lives exist. However, the premise starts with the same assumption. Saying the memories could have no other source than a past life is assuming past lives exist. The speaker has to argue for this, not be conceded the point.

Another example would be, “’President Reagan was a great communicator because he had the knack of talking effectively.” Great communicator and talking effectively are synonymous. Using one to support the other is circular reasoning. To support the claim, the speaker should say something like, “Ronald Reagan could articulate complex ideas in simple terms, which is one of the reasons he was a great communicator.”

Now we’ll consider the hasty generalization, in which one reaches a conclusion based on insufficient evidence. “I know a guy who has driven drunk nine times and never hurt anyone, so it’s safe.” It is unreasonable and dangerous to conclude drunk driving is safe, based on the experiences of one person out of six billion.

Also, be wary of survey results. They could be based on sample size that is too small. Or they could be selectively chosen from one out of 100 surveys that had desirable results. Or the result could be cherry picked, where other findings in the same survey are ignored for their inconvenience.

Phrasing is also crucial. This was demonstrated when caller ID was about to become commercially available. Surveys revealed either overwhelming support or overwhelming opposition, depending solely on if the question was, “Would you like to have the number of the person calling you displayed,” or “Would you like to have your number displayed when calling someone?”

We will close with the Red Herring, which is one of the easiest fallacies to spot and involves skirting the issue. Debates about whether President George W. Bush had blundered by invading Iraq often devolved into, “We need to support the troops,” which was irrelevant to the question. The Red Herring often displays a lack of responsibility, as in, “I got a ticket for fishing out of season. Don’t the cops have real criminals to focus on?” Or, “I’m not getting enough people to my skeptic blog because of these people believing in ghosts and ESP.”

by

“Probabilistic missiles” (Critical thinking)

SKELETON THNKR
It’s been fun spooking ghostbusters and searching for proof that Loch Ness Monster hunters exist. But I’m taking a respite from those pursuits to focus a few posts on encouraging critical thinking.

There are probably at least 100 types of logical fallacies, so I will focus on specific types in different posts as a way of organizing them. Fallacies fall into two main categories: Formal and informal. A formal fallacy is wrong because of a flaw in the argument’s logical structure.

Let’s say one is making a deductive argument, which is one based on a series of premises that reach a conclusion. It is possible for each premise to be correct and still arrive at an incorrect conclusion. For example:

1. My children are happy when I take them to Toys R Us.
2. My children are happy.
3. Therefore, I took them to Toys R Us.

Although the conclusion may be true, it could be false.

Seldom would such an elementary example be presented, but we can learn to detect it in more subtle forms. A politician might say his opponent believes in high taxes and government involvement in most aspects of life. Then he would add this is how it is done in communist countries, and let audience members infer that the opponent is a communist sympathizer.

Going back to the toys argument, here it is in valid form:

1. If I take my children to Toys R Us, they will be happy.
2. I took my children to Toys R Us.
3. Therefore, my children are happy. (By the way, does anyone know how to make a backwards R in computer type? It would be useful when referencing this store or Korn).

It is also possible for a conclusion to be false despite being supported by correct premises:

1. If Bill Clinton was British prime minister, he would be a head of state.
2. Bill Clinton was a head of state.
3. Therefore, Bill Clinton was British prime minister.

Again, it would be rare that such an obviously wrong example would be foisted. (That’s my past tense verb for the day, foisted). But a trained ear can spot a less glaring instance. Creationist Ray Comfort points to order in the universe as proof of God, without bothering to demonstrate that a god is the only way order could be attained. This is the formal, propositional fallacy of Affirming the Consequent, which will be handled more in-depth during a subsequent post. The focus this time is probabilistic fallacies. These occur when a listener wrongly takes something for granted because they deduce that it would probably be the case.

We’ll start with the Base Rate Fallacy. Here, if given both general and specific information, a person tends to focus on the latter. Let’s say all we know about George is that he wears black, has multiple piercings and tattoos, and listens to Deicide. Is he more likely to be a Christian or a Satanist?

Most people would underestimate the probability of him being a Christian, and overestimate the probability of him being a Satanist. Doing so requires downplaying in this instance the Base Rate of being a Christian. There are about 500 times more Christians in the world than Satanists. While it is more likely that George is a Satanist than someone who favors blue, is without piercings and ink, and listens to Count Basie, the probability of George being a Christian is more likely than his being a Satanist. It is important to understand that there are only two possibilities being offered, meaning he could be an atheist, agnostic, apatheist, Druid, or Pagan without being a Satanist.

We also see the Base Rate Fallacy when a person decides for safety reasons to travel by road or rail instead of air. An airplane is the safest method of travel, but since surviving an airplane crash is a far more remote possibility than making it through a bus or train wreck, persons fall prey to the fallacy.

The Conjunction Fallacy assumes that specific conditions are more probable than a single, general one. The most well-known example was offered by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, who presented the Linda Problem. In it, Linda is a 31-year-old, single, intelligent, philosophy major who has been active in liberal causes. Based on this information, which is more probable: That Linda is a bank teller; or, that Linda is a bank teller who is active in the feminist movement?

Most would guess the second choice. But the probability of two events occurring in conjunction is always less than or equal to the probability of just one occurring. Even though there is a tiny chance that Linda is a bank teller, and a good chance she is active in feminism, the chance that Linda is a bank teller feminist is less than her being just a teller.

Next, we have the Hot Hand Fallacy, and its opposite, the Gambler’s Fallacy. In the former, persons think that a run of events is likely to continue, whether it be a basketball player’s shots, consumer trends, or the stock market. By contrast, in the Gambler’s Fallacy a person thinks a trend is likely to end. Both ideas are wrong since random events cannot be predicted with certainty.

The Hot Hand Fallacy causes fans to think a basketball player is likely to hit or miss based on his performance in the previous few minutes. However, each shot is a separate occurrence, so the chance of a player making it is the same whether or not he sank the previous one. A study of four years’ worth of NBA field goal attempts bore this out.

Meanwhile, the Gambler’s Fallacy is the false belief that random numbers in a small sample will balance the way they do in large quantities. The best known example was at Monte Carlo in 1913, when the roulette ball landed on black 26 straight times. The casino made millions of francs off gamblers who figured red was surely coming up next. The chance of 26 straight black spins was one in 67,108,863. However, those were the odds of all red-black combinations that could occur in 26 spins.

When tossing a quarter, a run of five heads has just a one in 32 chance of occurring. But that’s before any tosses are made. After four straight heads, the chance of the next one coming up George Washington is one in two. This is reasonably common knowledge, but is harder to detect when the ideas become more abstract.

The chance of any one person dying from a tightrope fall is very small. If a person did perish in such a manner, it would be the Gambler’s Fallacy for his brother to conclude, “I can tightrope walk with virtual impunity since the chance of two persons in the same family dying this way is infinitesimally small.” No one would reach such a ludicrous conclusion, but persons can employ logic just as faulty when dealing with more complex issues.

Finally, we will consider the multiple comparisons fallacy. Usually, this is the result of politicians, columnists, or advertisers using selective reporting to bolster a claim, rather than the result of a lack of logical thinking on the listener.

Suppose 100 studies are done on the impact of wearing black slacks to contracting Alzheimer’s. Ninety-four of the studies show no impact. Three studies indicate wearers are twice as likely to have the disease, while the other three show they are half as likely. As a result, a clothing advertisement makes the boast, “Studies show black slack wearers less susceptible to Alzheimer’s.”

I’m wearing black slacks right now and don’t have Alzheimer’s, which sadly is the best transitional, closing sentence I can come up with.

by

“Hypnosis Hypothesis” (Hypnotism)

hypno
Hypnosis is a process whereby a person, under the direction of another, achieves increased relaxation, concentration, and susceptibility to suggestion. The effectiveness depends on what is trying to be accomplished, the mindset of the subject, and the ability of the hypnotist. When a person is hypnotized, their brain waves differ than when they are fully alert, but the person is never under the hypnotist’s command.

Hypnosis comes in many forms, so we will go through them, from the legitimate to the loony to the lurid.

The one potentially valuable use is hypnotherapy, where patients try to conquer an undesirable behavior, such as smoking, anger, or anxiety around strangers. There are some success stories here, although cognitive-behavioral therapy might bring the same results.

It is impossible to gauge if these successes are due to hypnosis because double blind tests cannot be conducted. There’s no way to pretend-hypnotize someone. Hypnotherapy is of little concern to the skeptic. It is not fraudulent or dangerous, and some patients see positive results. Furthermore, it makes quantifiable claims, as opposed to increased chakra empowerment via crystals. Also, it focuses on behavior and so is less susceptible to post hoc reasoning, like we would see in a claim that Reiki clears sinuses. The best therapies also involve post-hypnotic suggestion and guidance, where the patient is given a roadmap to continued success.

Analytical hypnotherapy is a form of psychoanalysis augmented by hypnosis. The client delves into thoughts, emotions, and memories under hypnosis, and this can help with serious issues such as phobias or personality disorders. It is important that this be done by a psychiatric specialist under strict conditions.

Here, we delve into the most well-known entrant in the field, the hypnotist show. These involve a dapper showman seating an audience member in a chair and inducing the subject to quack, walk, and look like a duck without actually being so, shooting a hole in that cliché. The subject’s actions are usually the result of conditioned behavior. They have an idea how a person under hypnosis should act, so they respond accordingly. The thought of an enthusiastic audience reaction could serve as another incentive to roll on the floor or to act as if hot coffee is cold. Such shows are sometimes entertaining, more often silly, and almost always innocuous.

Now we enter nonsense territory, our first stop being Past Life Hypnosis. Here, a person is guided by the hypnotist, and by guided I mean taken to as ridiculous a realm as the subject’s gullibility will allow. Most of what is brought forward are confabulations, which are fabricated, distorted or misinterpreted memories about one’s self or surroundings. The subject may describe what 19th Century London looked like, which most people could do a reasonable job of without hypnosis. Past lives are almost always interesting and occur in fascinating times. Memories of past lives could never be proven or disproven, though some hypnotists prefer the even safer avenue of having subjects examine their future lives.

Hypnosis seldom has a place in police work, but sometimes creeps in like other desperate detective measures, such as polygraphs, psychics, and truth serum. It might be of value in rare cases, though it is unclear if hypnosis is necessary to bring the memory back, and there’s the danger of false memories being concluded or suggested.

The greatest area of potential damage involves trying to bring repressed memories to the surface. Here, hypnosis and suggestive language can combine to create false memories of sexual abuse, alien abduction, or having witnessed a crime.

This can be detrimental to the patient and a living nightmare for the falsely accused. The most infamous case involved Gary Ramona, who was fired from his lucrative job and divorced by his wife after therapists used hypnosis and amobarbital to convince Ramona’s daughter that he had molested her.

The most deliberately evil incarnation is command hypnosis, which differs little from brainwashing. Suggestions are forceful, repetitive, and intended to alter a person’s beliefs or emotions. It’s pretty much like commercials except you can’t turn them off.